I've heard a lot of very smart people express disappointment in Parler being kicked off AWS and the Chinese Embassy in the US being kicked off of Twitter.

But both were for essentially the same reason: it broke the rules to use their services to promote mass murder.

I've heard a lot of people be concerned about freedom of expression. I do not find any value in these particular expressions – neither do these concerned people, I think – but I'm also unconcerned about the precedent or principles which led to these actions.

You can still use the internet for a lot of hateful garbage. But insisting that companies not have any rules for usage is bananas to me. "Free speech" doesn't answer this question, because we ought to have free association rights as well. Perhaps you believe we all ought to do everything we can to have inclusive conversations. But the only people included in the Parler assassination conversations were complete nutjobs. They did not want, and no one would benefit from, them being earnestly engaged. They need treatment. Or community, or something. The Chinese government only benefits from respectable people engaging in earnest conversation about whether the quality of citizen goes up when they arrest muslims. Muslims in danger of being killed do not benefit. We, as people just talking, do not benefit from the Chinese government's contribution.

I think, at the end of the day, that almost all higher-level internet services are about two things: either limiting criminal liability (in the case of Parler) or making a place that's not a complete hell-hole (in the case of the embassy). Amazon doesn't want the FBI asking them why they're assisting in the coordination of assassinations. And Twitter thinks the conversation will be better without people learning about how great genocide is.

I just can't fault them for putting their foot down. The world turns to mush when we don't have standards for each other. They should be diverse standards. There should be a place for everyone – and how fitting it is that the most reprehensible will have no place but the boundless void? The wild west is wild for a reason, and I don't think you can be an outlaw and demand institutional support at the same time.